Search

ObjectiveTo determine whether screening continuous EEG monitoring (cEEG) is associated with greater odds of treatment success for neonatal seizures.MethodsWe included term neonates with acute symptomatic seizures enrolled in the Neonatal Seizure Registry (NSR), a prospective, multicenter cohort of neonates with seizures. We compared 2 cEEG approaches: (1) screening cEEG, initiated for indications of encephalopathy or paralysis without suspected clinical seizures; and (2) confirmatory cEEG, initiated for the indication of clinical events suspicious for seizures, either alone or in addition to other indications. The primary outcome was successful response to initial seizure treatment, defined as seizures resolved without recurrence within 30 minutes after initial loading dose of antiseizure medicine. Multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed the association between cEEG approach and successful seizure treatment.ResultsAmong 514 neonates included, 161 (31%) had screening cEEG and 353 (69%) had confirmatory cEEG. Neonates with screening cEEG had a higher proportion of successful initial seizure treatment than neonates with confirmatory cEEG (39% vs 18%; p < 0.0001). After adjusting for covariates, there remained a greater odds ratio (OR) for successful initial seizure treatment in the screening vs confirmatory cEEG groups (adjusted OR 2.44, 95% confidence interval 1.45-4.11, p = 0.0008).ConclusionsThese findings provide evidence from a large, contemporary cohort of neonates that a screening cEEG approach may improve odds of successful treatment of acute seizures.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class III evidence that for neonates a screening cEEG approach, compared to a confirmatory EEG approach, increases the probability of successful treatment of acute seizures.

To determine whether screening continuous EEG monitoring (cEEG) is associated with greater odds of treatment success for neonatal seizures. We included term neonates with acute symptomatic seizures enrolled in the Neonatal Seizure Registry (NSR), a prospective, multicenter cohort of neonates with seizures. We compared 2 cEEG approaches: (1) screening cEEG, initiated for indications of encephalopathy or paralysis without suspected clinical seizures; and (2) confirmatory cEEG, initiated for the indication of clinical events suspicious for seizures, either alone or in addition to other indications. The primary outcome was successful response to initial seizure treatment, defined as seizures resolved without recurrence within 30 minutes after initial loading dose of antiseizure medicine. Multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed the association between cEEG approach and successful seizure treatment. Among 514 neonates included, 161 (31%) had screening cEEG and 353 (69%) had confirmatory cEEG. Neonates with screening cEEG had a higher proportion of successful initial seizure treatment than neonates with confirmatory cEEG (39% vs 18%; < 0.0001). After adjusting for covariates, there remained a greater odds ratio (OR) for successful initial seizure treatment in the screening vs confirmatory cEEG groups (adjusted OR 2.44, 95% confidence interval 1.45-4.11, = 0.0008). These findings provide evidence from a large, contemporary cohort of neonates that a screening cEEG approach may improve odds of successful treatment of acute seizures. This study provides Class III evidence that for neonates a screening cEEG approach, compared to a confirmatory EEG approach, increases the probability of successful treatment of acute seizures.

ObjectiveTo determine whether screening continuous EEG monitoring (cEEG) is associated with greater odds of treatment success for neonatal seizures.MethodsWe included term neonates with acute symptomatic seizures enrolled in the Neonatal Seizure Registry (NSR), a prospective, multicenter cohort of neonates with seizures. We compared 2 cEEG approaches: (1) screening cEEG, initiated for indications of encephalopathy or paralysis without suspected clinical seizures; and (2) confirmatory cEEG, initiated for the indication of clinical events suspicious for seizures, either alone or in addition to other indications. The primary outcome was successful response to initial seizure treatment, defined as seizures resolved without recurrence within 30 minutes after initial loading dose of antiseizure medicine. Multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed the association between cEEG approach and successful seizure treatment.ResultsAmong 514 neonates included, 161 (31%) had screening cEEG and 353 (69%) had confirmatory cEEG. Neonates with screening cEEG had a higher proportion of successful initial seizure treatment than neonates with confirmatory cEEG (39% vs 18%; p < 0.0001). After adjusting for covariates, there remained a greater odds ratio (OR) for successful initial seizure treatment in the screening vs confirmatory cEEG groups (adjusted OR 2.44, 95% confidence interval 1.45-4.11, p = 0.0008).ConclusionsThese findings provide evidence from a large, contemporary cohort of neonates that a screening cEEG approach may improve odds of successful treatment of acute seizures.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class III evidence that for neonates a screening cEEG approach, compared to a confirmatory EEG approach, increases the probability of successful treatment of acute seizures.

BackgroundProtease-activated receptor-1 antagonism by vorapaxar could facilitate arteriovenous fistula maturation but may increase bleeding risk.ObjectiveThe primary objective of the Vorapaxar Study for Maturation of arteriovenous fistula for Hemodialysis Access (VorapAccess) was to determine if vorapaxar improves arteriovenous fistula functional maturation in patients with end-stage renal disease.MethodsVorapAccess was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind pilot trial comparing 2.5 mg vorapaxar per day with placebo for twelve weeks starting on day two after arteriovenous fistula creation. The primary outcome was time to functional maturation defined as successful cannulation for six hemodialysis sessions within three weeks. The planned sample size was 50 participants. The study was terminated early after withdrawal of planned financial support. Given the small number of randomized patients, we performed descriptive analyses without inference testing.ResultsA total of 13 participants were randomly allocated study drug (six vorapaxar and seven placebo). The median age was 56 years and seven participants (54%) were female. The median (minimum-maximum) days to functional maturation were 169 (77-287) days in the vorapaxar group and 145 (48-198) days in the placebo group. Six of the 13 (46%) participants had arteriovenous fistula functional maturation within 180 days; two of six (33%) in the vorapaxar group and four of seven (57%) in the placebo group. There was one bleeding event in the placebo group.ConclusionFewer than half of participants had functional maturation within 180 days after surgery, suggesting a major need for agents or strategies that enhance arteriovenous fistula maturation.